I am not a fan of LD, but the main reason I am not participating in RT ladder much is the boot time. Games are WAY too long for me. I want to play a RT game in a half hour, not an hour. There are no team games, I don't see why we need more than 2 minutes (if no LD).

I don't see why we need more than 2 minutes

Laughable understanding of warlight strategy.

3-4 minutes would significantly cut down on the annoying games where the other player stalls out.

"The primary function of the ladder is rank players"

No, its to create games. Fizzer didnt put all the time and effort into making the ladder because hes desperate to know who is the best. He doesnt really care how accurately the ladder ranks people.

Why are you comparing it to chess? "we don't see in chess FM's playing against 1200 rated players" is such a flawed line of reasoning. Did you seriously think someone would read that and think 'omg sze is right! the scales hath fallen from my eyes'?

If the primary reason for ladder existence wouldn't be ranking people, we wouldn't have ranks at all, just created games. I wouldn't mind that change in rt ladder (not seeing who joined) if there is a similar to 1v1 ladder range mechanic introduced (meaning you're not paired if there is a bigger difference than x in rating). However that kind of solution combined with low participation on rt ladder provides other problems. Also, I am comparing it to chess, because there is a functioning ELO system in chess. Would you rather have me compare it to League of Legends or sth like that? Your last post was completely pointless, seems like you did not even bother to read what I wrote.

To me the main issue with the real time ladder is the low number of people playing at any given time. If people are watching to see who has joined the ladder and waiting for someone to join who they want to play (and it seems from people's comments that they are) then making it so that you don't know the identity of the people who have joined seems like it would obviously help.

Another thing would be to get a prompt at the end of a game asking if you want to play another game. That way you wouldn't have to leave the ladder as soon as you get a game if you aren't sure how many games you want to play.

Once there are more people playing then we can worry about better pairing algorithms. Right now that would be irrelevant, since you generally only have one potential opponent.

I read "everyone else in this thread is wrong, and hiding the identity of players waiting in the RT ladder lobby is a bad idea because it stops people (me) from selecting to play only against players rated similarly" But ranking people is an after thought, creating the games is the primary reason the ladder exists.

A balance has to be struck between accurately assesing players skill and making the ladder appealing to new players. Fizzer has quite rightly focused on the importance of attracting new players, which is something that ladder critics (you, gui, jsa) always forget. The ladder is not really for you, its not all about you. Read the complaints of the majority of newer players (the future of warlight) and see that 0 of them want what you want. Are you suprised that fizz is more interested in their needs? Did you even consider that possibility?

Edited 6/17/2014 01:52:12

"seems like you did not even bother to read what I wrote." Sorry i was too busy reading the dozen other people who all disagree with you.

Strange logic. Paraphrasing:

(1) Sze: "The ladder must pit similarly ranked players against each other. It can only do this if we can see who is in line waiting to play."

NO. ALL THE LADDERS ALREADY DO THIS. FIZZER CAN ADJUST THIS TOO, TO LIMIT OR INCREASE THE RANGE OF OPPONENTS WE CAN FACE. Sze, your argument is confusing. You say one thing as proof of another as if they are related. They are not. Just say the truth: I SZE WANT TO PICK MY OPPONENTS, THEREFORE I AM AGAINST CHANGING THE VISIBILITY MECHANISM. That is 100% true, factual, logical, and supports your chess argument.


(2) dead piggy: "The ladder is not really for you, it[']s not all about you. Read the complaints of the majority of newer players (the future of warlight) and see that 0 of them want what you want. Are you su[r]prised that fizz is more interested in their needs? Did you even consider that possibility?"

YES! SUPPLY THE FUCKING DEMAND! ...but wait...dead piggy, do you mean to say that the seasonal templates are what the people want to play? the new players, the future of WL, are dying to play boring seasonal templates? Was there a survey? (This is what companies do before they launch new products or services.) Did Fizzer investigate tournament templates and real-time and multi-game templates to see what most people prefer to play? Nope. Fizzer was too lazy. He wants a Fizzerian-centric strategic environment that is partially devoid of actual fun and complete strategy. Hardly anybody plays settings similar to at least 60% of the seasonal templates both before the seasonal template was created and after the season ends. The only reason anyone plays over half those templates at all is to compete and be ranked on (a) the seasonal ladder (when it takes place) and (b) the real-time ladder. This is a case of Fizzer trying to create an artificial demand. Honestly, those ME templates with light fog and silly settings are quite shitty. And that East Asian & Oceania template is rather shitty too (you need to make 5v3s to take territories, but they don't always work haha). If that template was never introduced to the seasonal ladder, absolutely nobody would have created it, because it is garbage.

Edited 6/17/2014 03:13:20

Cause: Supply is bad and lacks diversity. Overall demand is not met. We have other, better options for spending time on WL. The wait is too long. RT ladder is not as fun as it could be.

Effect: Participation is low.

Economics 101, high school level.

Edited 6/17/2014 05:01:38

Did you correct my grammar? Son of a bitch...

Yeah youre obviously correct, fizzer is a fairly bad business leader. I dont know how much youd enjoy a truly populist warlight though. This site would have become 'diplo game' centric a long time ago. People have been slathering for a decent diplomacy set up and rule structure for about a year now. You want to play a diplo ladder gui?

FFA ladder. Sure. "Diplo" is role-playing. There is not a mechanism in place to deter people from not following the assigned roles. So the idea of such a ladder is purely rhetorical.

But, to carry on with the "supply the fucking demand" theme: WL could be made so role-playing games have a better framework (alliances, ceasefires, built-in templates of popular role-playing games, new cards, etc.).

Members should be more involved in the decision-making process when it comes to something as simple as choosing a template that members will play. Does Fizzer even play the RT ladder? The 2v2 ladder? The seasonal ladder? If he doesn't, why does he even care what the templates are? To pick templates that people do not like and then expect them to enjoy playing them again and again is pure ignorance.

Imagine Fizzer as a host for a dinner party. He invites you to his house. For fruit he has apples and oranges (lack of variety!), when he could have had apples, oranges, mangoes, strawberries. For meat he has frozen fish and frozen chicken (bland settings!) spiced with salt (1v1 ladder as the basis of most templates!) when he could have had fresh fish and fresh chicken with fresh natural spices from Indonesia, Mexico, China, Thailand, or India. For non-alcoholic beverages he has water with sugar (reinforcement cards!) when he could have provided fresh juices and sodas people like. For alcohol he provides cheap beer (1v1 ladder settings as the base of half the templates!) instead of good wine, good beer, good hard liquor. People go to the party. Some eat and become full. Others try the food and leave right away. Some see the food and leave right away. Those that stay get drunk on cheap beer. But did they really have a great time? Could the party have been better? Will they go to the same party tomorrow (participation rates on the RT ladder)?

Fizzer as party host is limited by money. Fizzer as WL game host is limited by will, imagination, and a willingness to learn what the people want to play in a competitive environment.

In Chinese the word 聪明 means "intelligent." 耳 is ear. Intelligent people use their ears to listen to others. If you look at statues of Buddha or Confucius you will notice that they always have huge ears, which reflect their purported intelligence. 明 means clear and is composed of the sun 日 and moon 月. To be intelligent, you think and see things clearly. The templates chosen were not intelligent choices. Fizzer did not listen to members when choosing the templates. And he did not think things through clearly enough when creating the templates or the RT ladder system. And when people express an interest in seeing things improved, he does not listen. 不聪明

Edited 6/17/2014 05:33:17

Fizzer is a nice guy who just made a game because he felt compelled to. He never wanted to go into business, he was part of the indie computer game scene for a long time and realised he could make something that the community might think was cool. He actually made one of the best indie brower games (that ive seen anyway) and this was a blessing and a curse. It was expensive. Unfortunately that left him in the weird position that he needed to make some money off it, and he became slightly beholden to the customers. For the last few years hes struggled to reconcile his semi complete vision of his perfect WL, and the reality of having to go through the bother of paying for it, coding it, give people what they want and his personal life.

He still hasnt reconciled his vision (all those templates you hate and LD) and reality (supplying the fucking demand), and i dont think he will. WL will just hobble along, directionless and backward but still basically fun.

I wouldn't mind that change in rt ladder (not seeing who joined) if there is a similar to 1v1 ladder range mechanic introduced (meaning you're not paired if there is a bigger difference than x in rating).

Learn to read please, reading > using caps.

Napoleon, relax.

☑ rekt
☐ not rekt